pvxfandomcom-20200214-history
User talk:Da
This is the reincarnation of a project I'd started long ago. Suggestions and trolling go here, positive contributions on the actual page. ··· Danny Does 04:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC) -- *Meta and Non-Meta would be more likely category names... *The build documentation should be clear and concise, easy to understand and implement. *The build should be vetted by a few veteran players before it becomes available within the build server system. *During the build submittal, the front-end of the server should automatically search for similar builds, to prevent build cloning and promote build expansion. *Builds could be organized by form and function (pvp, pve, farming, general purpose), main professions, team builds (more than 1 character or usage of heroes), location builds (for specific areas, missions, and quests) *Ratings of how well the build performs it's function, reguardless of other factors, would be useful. *Ratings of how well the build can still function under adverse conditions would also be realistic. *Ratings should not be the be all and end all of how well the build actually performs. Ok ... I think that's enough of my thoughts on this issue. It might be a pretty good system, but you have a lot of groundwork to cover to make it a reality. Skie M 04:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :You apparently missed the idea. The idea isn't to replicate PvX, it's to improve on it. ··· Danny Does 05:23, 28 April 2009 (UTC) The idea's pretty cool, but your reasoning is pretty terrible. -- Armond Warblade 05:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :You've become a shitting troll tbh. Also, where is my reasoning flawed? ··· Danny Does 05:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC) ::TBH, you kinda made the idea out to be "reconstruct PvX and make it better than before". So the suggestions by Skie M seem rather legit to me. 05:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::the idea's to create a place to store meta builds without any sort of vetting system tbh. basically, a large fileserver of builds. ··· Danny Does 06:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC) ::::But how would the people using that new system be able to determine which builds are considered better than others? People could just put up any old echo-mending build and call it uber-meta-awesomeness and some noob is gonna wonder what the hell is goin on... If you have a system that is a collection of a large number of builds for guildwars, there HAS to be some sort of organization or teiring on usefullness or you will have failed before you even get started. Can there be improvements over wiki? yes .. do you have some good ideas in there? quite possibly. Now how about we discuss the issue as civilized people rather than making personal attacks? :) Skie M 06:11, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::::Read the page through, specifically the Build Creation section, then we'll consider less attacks. ··· Danny Does 06:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::::Echomending doesn't get in because it's never on obs. You have two or three people reviewing the builds for not-shitness just in case you get 28-minute conga lines (as PvX should have been in the first place). You don't need a vetting system to tell you which build is "best" because you pick builds that synergize best with the rest of the team. Then again, the whole idea here is based off people knowing what they're doing, which is precisely the problem with build storages in the first place (anyone who needs them doesn't know enough about the game to know how to use them). -- Armond Warblade 06:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::::: I would like clarification. Do you intend for there to be two sections: A "this is current meta" and a "these are decent builds that aren't meta"? 'Cause that would be interesting. The biggest thing this site lacks (imo as a casual player) is actual playtesting of a build before rating it. I've seen plenty of builds that did very well for me (which is rare, since I don't actually play that well), yet get downvoted due to "theorytesting". "Theory crafting" and "theory testing" are part of what broke us down, and I'm not sure how we could make sure people DON'T do those. Unless I'm overthinking this. Eronth 06:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::::::Those idiots who trash vote a build without even trying it out a few times to see if it works really piss me off. If it's a proper build that has been working for a skilled player for some time, you should at least have the balls to run the damn build before trash-voting it. >reset indent< I was talking about the personal attacks on THIS page, not the front page. Anyways, you need some sort of system to sort the builds in a way that new users can easily understand... something beyond the "hey this is build freakin roxxxxx!!" or "rofl this is shitty go fucking /wrists and die", because that's what I see a lot of around here. Proper understanding of what a newer player considers a good build compared to what a veteran player would consider a good build also helps. For a newer player who is concentrating just on PvE, your typical wammo running mending + live vicariously with a vampiric or elemental blade and a bunch of adrenal skills, defensive stances, is pretty much godly ... it will easily get them through prophecies with access to just henchmen. For a veteran, that's a baby build that has no right being anywhere in the game because they have access to much better skills and proper tactics to deal with things that get in the way, and heroes which they can use to fill in the gaps in their builds quite nicely. Now, how does PvXwiki cater to the needs of a noob? Obviously, it doesn't. Perhaps your idea can fill that need ... new players need decent builds .. not the BEST builds, just something that WILL work in most situations and can get the job done. It's just a suggestion, but you could start your system up with that goal in mind, and expand it from there. Skie M 06:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :To be honest, if that ever came up the best thing to do would be to suggest the new user to a certain build (like Dslash or w/e) and suggest they obtain heroes of some such) making builds for each and every type of person (like one build for the guy who hasn't got NF and one build for the guy who doesn't have 3 necro heroes etc). blah blah blah, imo if someone can't use the best builds on here they should use common sense and at least use what they can from this wiki and then use things for themselves!!! (ie the build/hero setup may be inferior to sabway or w/e but it gets them through pve). :PvX should accomidate for the best builds, there should be a meta section and a non-meta sections, simple as. FrostytheAdmin 06:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :: Meta and non-meta for PvE and PvP each, right? If this is a serious consideration, we should probably start work on how the non-meta parts will work. Otherwise it will be the exact same way as it is now, hundreds of meta passed and about 15 really really good, soon-to-be-meta, builds. Eronth 06:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC) : In response to Eronth, I intend for there to be a section of "Meta" and "Gimmicks that might go meta". There would be no actual vetting, ever. Theorycrafting, imo, should be left up to those who have the ability and level of understanding necessary to do so (read: guilds on obs). :In response to Skie, please be more concise, or i'm going to start tl;dr'ing anything you write. There would be no "shitty" section, per the comment I made directly above this one. There's no reason to store anything but the best because there's no reason to use anything but the best. It would be impossible to cater to people who don't have the skills required to run the "best" builds because there's no telling what skills they might be lacking. You appear to be lacking in an understanding of "meta", or at least my goal, so I'd ask that you be sure you've familiarized yourself with both. And again, conciseness is key. ··· Danny Does 06:54, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::Frosty, I'm not sure a non-meta section would even be necessary. Archives, of course, but why store non-meta builds that never were meta? Also, if you're interested in taking this in the direction of revamping Real Vetting and such, you're welcome to, and I'll assist, but my intentions still lie in creating a TB-esque build server in favor of the wiki, due to the obvious issues that being a wiki entails. ··· Danny Does 06:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::: Question from my curiosity? What about the builds that aren't quite meta, but are pretty good/annoying (for the opo to deal with), yet lack that final oompf to become meta. Would there be a section for those (essentially the non-meta section) or is this just going to be a meta and meta-in-the-makings site? Eronth 07:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::::It would really depend. If it was being run on a large scale, it would be stored. If it was rarely being run, it wouldn't. It would be a large amount of judgment, but not any more than goes into vetting here at PvX. ··· Danny Does 07:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC) ::::::Without vetting (or at least having a good group of guys around who can at least say "yeah, that looks like it could work", theorycrafting will run amok ... both here and in your proposed new server. You have to have some control over the builds being put in or every jerk is gonna run up and piss all over it. Skie M 07:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::::::Please, for the love of God, read everything on both this page and the actual page. Builds must be submitted and confirmed by one of a few admins who would, for the better or worse, be of my choosing. There is always the chance that I could write a matching algorithm that would compare skill similarities and bump them to the top of a queue for review if a large number of similar builds are submitted. ··· Danny Does 07:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC) ::::::::It's also already been said at least twice that there would be no user submissions. -- Armond Warblade 14:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::::::::Actually, there would be user submissions, but they wouldn't be user reviewed, and they wouldn't accessible until reviewed by an admin. ··· Danny Does 19:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC) ::::::::::Hmm. I thought we were discussing a program to read obs and report the results to the site. -- Armond Warblade 21:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :::::::::::Oh god no. That would be way more programming than I could imagine. I'm talking about a program that would simply act as a front-end for a server storing builds, as well as allowing builds to be submitted. ··· Danny Does 21:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC) Adding my two cents to this. PvX has long been the website I've come to in hopes that I'd find something that would fit my play style. Unfortunately, I had to adapt with whatever the meta happened to be, or forever be considered bad. This presents a HUGE gap for (the already mentioned) noobs to overcome. Frosty said that newer players with little to no access to the best/better skills would be subject to modifying the builds to suit their needs and such. Here's the problem. What about those players with only Prophecies? Or those players who don't know what an elite skill is? What about those players who want to get better, but lack the means to do so? How about those people who come to PvX, seeking some kind of camaraderie, only to have it shot down by us more experienced PvP/PvErs? We're not the most friendly of communities, but there comes a time where things MUST change. We're looking at an ever-shrinking user base for a game that's been dying for well over a year now. I'm not suggesting we hold the newer users hands and invite them into the community so they can post dupes and really shitty dupes of already-existing builds, but there needs to be something done about the vetting issues. There needs to be sections where a fairly bad build, that by comparison, isn't really bad compared to some others (with PvE skills or designed to mesh well with the current meta) can be stored. And not just the user space. Maybe a user guide. Maybe a "Newbie Section", I don't know, but we're all dickheads, and our time on this site has made a lot of the users I see on here into elitist douche bags. I even find myself criticizing bad players in RA/JQ or even HA. I'm not even that fucking good at Guild Wars. There needs to be some consensus on what we're going to do about this problem, and a plan on how we're going to approach it. ~ Big sysop 21:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC) :I've only briefly read what you've said Big, but I just needed to say something(s) while it's fresh in my mind =p. Basically we won't do a "newbie section", everything that would be submitted there would fall under WELL. But reading your post I did think we aren't "newbie friendly" so a couple of thoughts spring to mind: :#Create a page just explaining the basics of builds, skills and equipment etc. (the basic stuff such as only 1 elite per bar etc.) :#This is something I think would be a good thing to add: A little guide for each profession of skills to buy and/or unlock early on. :As for the whole "what if someone only has Prophecies/Factions/NF" we do have categories for builds that only contain skills from certain campaigns (though a lot of builds won't hvae these tags added to them yet), but they will likely be in other. Again the idea of one campaign bars only does go against WELL, but I could see the possiablity of adding a couple of builds for each game. Truthfully i think everything should jsut be made into a newbie guide and go from there >.>. :This probably wasn't the best place to start this discussion so if someone wants to respond to these last few posts i think we should move the disscussion to the comunity portal talk page. ~ PheNaxKian Sysop 22:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC) ::This isn't intended for PvX at all. -- Armond Warblade 01:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC) :::I smell revolution in the air, but I'm pretty sure PvX will quickly just turn on a fan and spray some lysol around. ··· Danny Does 03:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC) the first thing that has to be done is lowering all the trolling Terran 00:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC) ::::I barely troll and ive been here forever :/ I think it should've been named Buildwiki in retrospect though--Relyk 07:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC) :Big, that's how any game works. tbh newbies should learn how to play the game themselves like everyone else had to rather than getting "rushed" through the game, otherwise it's not as fun :D--Relyk 07:47, 10 May 2009 (UTC) I have another suggestion oh mighty danny. How about sifting through the Archives and deleting any of the builds that weren't meta. If this is done it will really reflect what was good/bad. Also I agree with your comment to me about non-meta being a bad idea. Also a Meta link on the front page would own hard (like next to good great etc) FrostytheAdmin 09:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC) :User:Daññy/Vetting Restructure ··· Danny Does 16:31, 10 May 2009 (UTC)